However, on
the subject of Anthropogenic Global Warming, all the scientists working in the various fields related to climate change are in agreement.
Not exact matches
In both my personal experience
of peer review and in discussions with medical colleagues on this
subject, I know — and, boy, BillD really ought to know — how the peer review process can get screwed up by the sorts
of concerted and deliberately deceptive measures practiced by the
anthropogenic global warming cabal that was cataclysmically de-pantsed by the Climategate revelations, particularly with regard to the insights provided by the e-mails
of the C.R.U. correspondents.
And while we are on the
subject, can you give us one, just one, piece
of empirical evidence to support the
anthropogenic global warming hypothesis.
No one has
subjected anthropogenic global warming to the rigors
of the Scientific Method.
Dr. Roy Spencer, like Dr. Richard Lindzen (the
subject of a few recent articles), is one
of very few climate scientists who remain unconvinced that most
of the the recent
global warming has been caused by humans (
anthropogenic).
«The resultant adjusted data show clearly, both visually and when
subjected to statistical analysis, that the rate
of global warming due to other factors (most likely these are exclusively
anthropogenic) has been remarkably steady during the 32 years from 1979 through 2010.
This publication has been
subject to a considerable amount
of hype, for instance apparently «[LC09] has absolutely, convincingly, and irrefutably proven the theory
of Anthropogenic Global Warming to be completely false.»